[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r1340253 - /subversion/trunk/COMMITTERS

From: Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 17:32:17 -0700

On 05/21/2012 04:18 AM, Vladimir Berezniker wrote:
> Hyrum,
> 4. Use runtime rather than checked exceptions.
> I strongly dislike checked exceptions in code paths where there is
> no expected recovery logic that can be applied. This just forces people
> to either write a lot of try catch blocks that don't have any useful
> logic, propagate the exceptions through all the methods, or catch and
> wrap the exception in a RuntimeException derived class.

I don't know if any of the other JavaHL coders saw this note, so I
suggest sending a separate email with a descriptive subject "Switching
to unchecked Java exceptions" since it is a significant change in the
API and some other people may want to have a say.

I do think it's a good idea when there is no action that the caller can
do to recover. I cannot think of any drawbacks right now, and in our
own non-svn Scala code we effectively use unchecked exceptions (because
Scala doesn't do compile time checking if an exception is handled).

You're proposing keeping checked exceptions when the caller can do

Received on 2012-05-30 02:32:54 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.